## Menachot Daf 106a

###### Menachot 106a:1
[Menachot 106a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:1)

וּמֵרְקִיקִין, וְקָא קָמֵיץ מֵחַלּוֹת אַרְקִיקִין וּמֵרְקִיקִין אַחַלּוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**and wafers** together; **and** according to this suggestion, **he removes a handful from the loaves for the wafers and** a handful **from the wafers for the loaves.**


###### Menachot 106a:2
[Menachot 106a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:2)

שָׁמְעִינַן לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, דְּאָמַר: אִם קָמַץ וְעָלָה בְּיָדוֹ מֵאֶחָד עַל שְׁנֵיהֶם – יָצָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **We have heard that Rabbi Shimon said: If** one brought a meal offering that is part loaves and part wafers, and the priest **removed a handful, and** that which **came up in his hand** was only **from one of the two** types, either only loaves or only wafers, **he has fulfilled** his obligation of removing a handful.


###### Menachot 106a:3
[Menachot 106a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:3)

וְהָא אִיכָּא מוֹתַר שֶׁמֶן, דְּאִי מֶחֱצָה חַלּוֹת וּמֶחֱצָה רְקִיקִין אָמַר – מוֹתַר הַשֶּׁמֶן מַחְזִירוֹ לַחַלּוֹת, אִי כּוּלְּהוּ רְקִיקִין אָמַר – מוֹתַר הַשֶּׁמֶן נֶאֱכָל לַכֹּהֲנִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But isn’t there** a problem with **the surplus oil?** The Gemara (75a) states that if a meal offering is brought half as loaves and half as wafers, the oil is divided equally between them; half is mixed with the loaves and half is applied to the wafers. The surplus oil from the wafers may also be mixed in with the loaves. But if the meal offering is baked entirely as wafers, the oil that remains is given to the priests. Therefore, Abaye’s explanation of the mishna is problematic, **because if** the person **said** in his vow that he would bring **half loaves and half wafers, one brings back the surplus oil** and mixes it in **with the loaves.** But **if he said** that **the entire** offering shall be **wafers, the surplus oil** should be **eaten by the priests.**


###### Menachot 106a:4
[Menachot 106a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:4)

כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוּדָה, דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: מוֹשְׁחָן כְּמִין כִּי, וּמוֹתַר הַשֶּׁמֶן נֶאֱכָל לַכֹּהֲנִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara resolves this problem **in accordance with** the statement of **Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda. As it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Shimon** that the oil of a meal offering baked half as loaves and half as wafers is applied as follows: **One anoints** the wafers **in the shape of** the Greek letter **chi,** Χ, **and the surplus oil is eaten by the priests.** Consequently, the surplus oil of a meal offering baked half as loaves and half as wafers is used the same way as that of a meal offering baked entirely as wafers.


###### Menachot 106a:5
[Menachot 106a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:5)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב כָּהֲנָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: וְהָא אִיכָּא לְסַפּוֹקַהּ בְּמִנְחַת נְסָכִים, דְּאָמַר רָבָא: מִתְנַדֵּב אָדָם מִנְחַת נְסָכִים בְּכׇל יוֹם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Kahana said to Rav Ashi:** If one specifies in his vow which meal offering he will bring, and subsequently forgets, why does he bring only five types of meal offerings? **Isn’t there** room **to be uncertain** with regard to another type of meal offering, namely, the **meal offering** brought with the **libations** that accompany various burnt offerings? This meal offering can also be brought independently as a gift, **as Rava said: A person may volunteer a meal offering** brought with the **libations every day,** if he so wishes.


###### Menachot 106a:6
[Menachot 106a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:6)

כִּי קָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ (סִימָן: ״יָחִיד״, ״בִּגְלַל״, ״לְבוֹנָה״, ״בְּלוֹג״, ״מְקַמְּצָה״) –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that there is no uncertainty with regard to the possibility that he said that he would bring a meal offering brought with the libations, because it is completely different than the other types of meal offerings. **When one is uncertain** as to which meal offering he vowed to bring, the uncertainty is only with regard to certain meal offerings. The Gemara presents **a mnemonic** for these differences: **Individual, due to, frankincense, with a *log*, removes a handful of it.**


###### Menachot 106a:7
[Menachot 106a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:7)

בָּאָה בִּגְלַל יָחִיד, בָּאָה בִּגְלַל צִיבּוּר – לָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: The uncertainty with regard to which meal offering one vowed to bring is with regard to a meal offering that **is brought** exclusively **due to** the obligation of **an individual.** But **one is not uncertain** with regard to a meal offering that **is brought due to** the obligation of **the public,** e.g., a meal offering brought with libations, which accompany communal offerings as well as individual ones; he certainly did not vow to bring this type of meal offering.


###### Menachot 106a:8
[Menachot 106a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:8)

כִּי קָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ – בָּאָה בִּגְלַל עַצְמָהּ, בָּאָה בִּגְלַל זֶבַח – לָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, **when one is uncertain** it is with regard to a meal offering that **is brought due to its own** obligation. But **one is not uncertain** with regard to a meal offering **brought** with libations **due to** the requirements of **an offering.**


###### Menachot 106a:9
[Menachot 106a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:9)

כִּי קָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ – טְעוּנָה לְבוֹנָה, שֶׁאֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה לְבוֹנָה – לָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When one is uncertain** it is with regard to a meal offering that **requires** that **frankincense** be brought with it. But **one is not uncertain** with regard to a meal offering brought with libations, **which does not require frankincense.**


###### Menachot 106a:10
[Menachot 106a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:10)

כִּי קָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ – בָּאָה בְּלוֹג, בָּאָה בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה לוּגִּין – לָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When one is uncertain,** it is with regard to a type of meal offering that **is brought with** one ***log*** of oil. But **one is not uncertain** if it **is brought with three *log*** of oil or more, which is the *halakha* with regard to meal offerings brought with libations (see Numbers 15:5–6, 9).


###### Menachot 106a:11
[Menachot 106a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:11)

כִּי קָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ – טְעוּנָה קְמִיצָה, שֶׁאֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה קְמִיצָה – לָא קָא מִסְתַּפְּקָא לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When one is uncertain** it is only with regard to a meal offering that **requires removal of a handful.** But **one is not uncertain** with regard to a meal offering **that does not require removal of a handful,** which is the *halakha* with regard to a meal offering brought with libations.


###### Menachot 106a:12
[Menachot 106a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:12)

״פֵּירַשְׁתִּי מִנְחָה שֶׁל עֶשְׂרוֹנִים״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: If one says: **I specified a meal offering of tenths** of an ephah but I do not remember how many I specified, according to the Rabbis he must bring a meal offering of sixty-tenths of an ephah. According to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi he must bring sixty meal offerings, each with a different number of tenths, from one to sixty.


###### Menachot 106a:13
[Menachot 106a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:13)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״פֵּירַשְׁתִּי מִנְחָה, וְקָבַעְתִּי בִּכְלִי אֶחָד שֶׁל עֶשְׂרוֹנִים, וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ מָה פֵּירַשְׁתִּי״ – יָבִיא מִנְחָה שֶׁל שִׁשִּׁים עֶשְׂרוֹנִים, דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: יָבִיא מְנָחוֹת שֶׁל עֶשְׂרוֹנִים מֵאֶחָד וְעַד שִׁשִּׁים, שֶׁהֵן אֶלֶף וּשְׁמוֹנֶה מֵאוֹת וּשְׁלֹשִׁים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Sages taught** in a *baraita*: If one says: **I specified** that I would bring **a meal offering, and I established** that they must be brought **in** one **vessel of tenths** of an ephah, **but I do not know what** number of tenths **I specified, he must bring** one **meal offering of sixty-tenths** of an ephah. This is **the statement of the Rabbis. Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: He must bring** sixty **meal offerings of tenths** in sixty vessels, each containing an amount **from one**-tenth **until sixty**-tenths, **which are** in total **1,830** tenths of an ephah.


###### Menachot 106a:14
[Menachot 106a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:14)

״פֵּירַשְׁתִּי וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ מָה פֵּירַשְׁתִּי, וְאִי זוֹ מֵהֶן פֵּירַשְׁתִּי, וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ כַּמָּה פֵּירַשְׁתִּי״ – יָבִיא חָמֵשׁ מְנָחוֹת שֶׁל שִׁשִּׁים שִׁשִּׁים עֶשְׂרוֹנִים, שֶׁהֵן שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת, דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: יָבִיא חָמֵשׁ מְנָחוֹת שֶׁל שִׁשִּׁים עֶשְׂרוֹנִים מֵאֶחָד וְעַד שִׁשִּׁים, שֶׁהֵן תִּשְׁעָה אֲלָפִים וּמֵאָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: If one said: **I specified** a certain type of meal offering with a certain number of tenths of an ephah to be brought in one vessel, **but I do not know what I specified, or which** type **of** meal offering **I specified, and I do not know how many** tenths of an ephah **I specified, he must bring** the **five** different types **of meal offerings,** and each one must contain **sixty-tenths** of an ephah, **which are** in total **three-hundred-**tenths of an ephah. This is **the statement of the Rabbis. Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: He must bring five** different types of **meal offerings,** and for each type he must bring **sixty** meal offerings, each with a different number of tenths, **from one until sixty, which are** in total **9,150** tenths of an ephah.


###### Menachot 106a:15
[Menachot 106a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:15)

בְּמַאי קָא מִיפַּלְגִי? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: בְּמוּתָּר לְהַכְנִיס חוּלִּין לָעֲזָרָה קָא מִיפַּלְגִי, רַבִּי סָבַר: אָסוּר לְהַכְנִיס חוּלִּין לָעֲזָרָה, וְרַבָּנַן סָבְרִי: מוּתָּר לְהַכְנִיס חוּלִּין לָעֲזָרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **With regard to what** principle **do** the Rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi **disagree? Rav Ḥisda said: They disagree with regard to** whether it is **permitted to bring non-sacred** items **into the** Temple **courtyard. Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **holds** that **it is prohibited to bring non-sacred** items **into the** Temple **courtyard.** Therefore, it is necessary to bring sixty meal offerings of each type, as if one merely brings one meal offering of sixty-tenths of an ephah in a single vessel, he may be in violation of this prohibition, as it is possible that he vowed to bring less than that amount, and the surplus amount is non-sacred. **And the Rabbis hold** that **it is permitted to bring non-sacred** items **into the** Temple **courtyard.** Therefore, even if the meal offering is of a greater volume than necessary, it is inconsequential.


###### Menachot 106a:16
[Menachot 106a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:16)

רָבָא אָמַר: דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא אָסוּר לְהַכְנִיס חוּלִּין לָעֲזָרָה, וְהָכָא בְּמוּתָּר לְעָרֵב חוֹבָה בִּנְדָבָה קָא מִיפַּלְגִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said** that the dispute between the Rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is with regard to a different issue: **Everyone** agrees that **it is prohibited to bring non-sacred** items **into the** Temple **courtyard, and here they disagree with regard to** whether it is permitted **to mix** an offering that fulfills **an obligation** together **with a gift** offering.


###### Menachot 106a:17
[Menachot 106a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:17)

רַבָּנַן סָבְרִי: מוּתָּר לְעָרֵב חוֹבָה בִּנְדָבָה, וְרַבִּי סָבַר: אָסוּר לְעָרֵב חוֹבָה בִּנְדָבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Rabbis hold** that **it is permitted to mix** an offering that fulfills **an obligation** together **with a gift** offering, and therefore one may bring sixty-tenths in one vessel and stipulate that the amount beyond his obligation will be a gift offering. **And Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **holds** that **it is prohibited to mix** an offering that fulfills **an obligation** together **with a gift** offering, and therefore one cannot make such a stipulation; every possible meal offering requires its own vessel. Concerning each vessel, he stipulates that if this one can fulfill his vow, it should count as fulfillment of his vow, and otherwise it should serve as a gift offering.


###### Menachot 106a:18
[Menachot 106a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:18)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי לְרָבָא: לְרַבָּנַן דְּאָמְרִי מוּתָּר לְעָרֵב חוֹבָה בִּנְדָבָה, הָא בָּעֵינַן שְׁנֵי קְמָצִים? דְּקָמֵיץ וַהֲדַר קָמֵיץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to Rava: According to the Rabbis, who say** that **it is permitted to mix** an offering that fulfills **an obligation** together **with a gift** offering, and one vessel with sixty-tenths of an ephah can serve in part to fulfill the obligation and in part as a gift offering, there is a difficulty: **Don’t we require** the removal of **two handfuls,** one for the obligatory meal offering and one for the gift offering? Rava answered: According to the Rabbis, it is required **that** the priest **removes a handful and again removes a handful.**


###### Menachot 106a:19
[Menachot 106a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:19)

וְהָא קָא קָמֵיץ מֵחוֹבָה אַנְּדָבָה וּמִנְּדָבָה אַחוֹבָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye said to Rava: **But** if so, since the tenths that fulfill an obligation and the tenths that are a gift are mixed together in a single vessel, when the priest removes a handful, **isn’t he removing a handful from** tenths that fulfill **an obligation** to account **for** tenths that are **a gift** offering, **and** removing a handful **from** tenths that are **a gift** offering to account **for** tenths that fulfill **an obligation?**


###### Menachot 106a:20
[Menachot 106a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:20)

דְּתָלֵי לֵיהּ בְּדַעַת כֹּהֵן, דְּאָמַר: כֹּל הֵיכָא דְּמָטְיָא יְדָא דְּכֹהֵן הַשְׁתָּא – חוֹבָה, וּלְבַסּוֹף – נְדָבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava answered Abaye: This is not difficult, **as** the one who brings the meal offering **renders it dependent on the intent of the priest, as he says: Wherever the priest’s hand reaches now,** when he removes the first handful, shall be the location of the tenths that fulfill my **obligation, and** wherever his hand reaches **at the end,** when removing the second handful, shall be **a gift** offering.


###### Menachot 106a:21
[Menachot 106a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:21)

וְאַקְטוֹרֵי הֵיכִי מַקְטַר? לַיקְטַר נְדָבָה בְּרֵישָׁא – דְּחוֹבָה הֵיכִי מַקְטַר לַהּ? דִּלְמָא כּוּלַּהּ חוֹבָה הִיא, וְחָסְרוּ לְהוּ שִׁירַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye asked Rava: **But how does** the priest **burn** the handful upon the altar? If the priest **will burn** the handful from the **gift** offering **first, how can he** then **burn** the handful **of the** tenths that fulfill the **obligation? Perhaps the entire** meal offering **is** for the **obligation,** as the vow was to bring sixty-tenths of an ephah, and everything apart from the first handful, including the second handful, is the remainder, **and** by burning part of it the priest causes **the remainder to be lacking.**


###### Menachot 106a:22
[Menachot 106a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:22)

וְאָמַר מָר: שִׁירַיִם שֶׁחָסְרוּ בֵּין קְמִיצָה לְהַקְטָרָה – אֵין מַקְטִיר קוֹמֶץ עֲלֵיהֶן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the Master said:** With regard to the **remainder** of a meal offering **that became lacking between the removal of the handful and the burning** of the handful upon the altar, the *halakha* is that **one does not burn the handful on its** account, as it is not considered a valid meal offering.


###### Menachot 106a:23
[Menachot 106a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Menachot/r/106a:23)

לַיקְטַר חוֹבָה בְּרֵישָׁא – דִּנְדָבָה הֵיכִי מַקְטַר לַהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Alternatively, if the priest **will burn** the handful that fulfills the **obligation first, how can he burn** the handful **of the gift** offering?